417 posts in this topic

It would be a total non issue except the media is making it an issue by blowing it up and making look like it's upset those evil backward men on the internet. Like I said, that's a convenient narrative for the makers of the movie and I'm sure they are happy to stir the pot even more.

Obviously the movie isn't promoting segregation, it's about trying to create a strong feminist icon.. but then they pull a stunt where they ban men. It's for effect clearly , but what's the message they are sending

This movie is another mediocre doo doo cash grab that the entire superhero genre has become so......SJW, feminism, Trump, racists, oppressed, Russia, the patriarchy, and please buy a ticket.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

...Okay. Well, it's one thing to disagree with my argument, it's another thing entirely to resort to such a vitriolic response. I thought I'd made it pretty clear that my reaction was one of apathy to mild annoyance, I'm certainly not ''mad''. And as for being tiny - I'll have you know I'm of average height at least, if not an inch or two taller!

In any case, since it's clear there's not going to be anything in the way of reasonable, adult debate here...enjoy the film, I guess?

I can't imagine you were interested in any sort of reasonable discussion when you thought comparing a film event to civil marriage equality.

2 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

It would be a total non issue except the media is making it an issue by blowing it up and making look like it's upset those evil backward men on the internet. Like I said, that's a convenient narrative for the makers of the movie and I'm sure they are happy to stir the pot even more.

Obviously the movie isn't promoting segregation, it's about trying to create a strong feminist icon.. but then they pull a stunt where they ban men. It's for effect clearly , but what's the message they are sending

Man whines on internet forum about being butt hurt that there is a one time special event in which he's not invited to the party. Man then says that the media is making up all these butt hurt men.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Actually I'm mildly surprised by this route of manufactured controversy. I was expecting something more along the cultural approriation tactic, white lady from the amazon and all.

There's no cultural appropriation going on with this character. She's culturally Greek, basically. Amazonian is used as a descriptor regarding her stature and build. She's not meant to be Amazonian in the Central/South American sense. The character has always been anglo.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There's no cultural appropriation going on with this character. She's culturally Greek, basically. Amazonian is used as a descriptor regarding her stature and build. She's not meant to be Amazonian in the Central/South American sense. The character has always been anglo.

No you haven't. The character has never been anything other than anglo. It's not flimsy, because it doesn't exist. You conflated the word Amazon or Amazonian to race, which does not apply to this character. There is no way to apply cultural appropriation to this character unless you wanted to protest the fact that the actress who plays her in the movie is Israeli, and the character itself is traditionally Greek.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I'm looking forward to the movie. This is one of those occurrences where the buzz ensnared me at the right time. I was alarmingly apathetic to this film for awhile. Trailers didn't really do much to incite much fire within me. Over the last couple weeks, since the final trailer, I've been looking forward to release, though. Positive early responses contributed a ton. They've done a great job keeping the specifics of the plot under wraps, at the risk of some pretty bland trailers. Not ideal, but it worked out...at least for me.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

The character has never been anything other than anglo. It's not flimsy, because it doesn't exist. You conflated the word Amazon or Amazonian to race, which does not apply to this character. There is no way to apply cultural appropriation to this character unless you wanted to protest the fact that the actress who plays her in the movie is Israeli, and the character itself is traditionally Greek.

Which is all it takes to get a good controversy brewing.

I have seen far flimsier charges stick. You aggressively explaining your nerd knowledge of Wonder women doesn't stand a chance once these things start going.

I can aggressively explain to people that no one gives a shit about a women only screening at a movie theater but it's not going to matter, it's already started.

Looks like early efforts were more along the lines of what I was expecting. Like this article from back in March attacking Wonder Woman and her crew for being too white. Which begins as an attack but by the end of the article manages to link to the trailer and plug the release date.

"The Amazons were middle Eastern women but yeah sure just make everyone white w/e"

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I can't imagine you were interested in any sort of reasonable discussion when you thought comparing a film event to civil marriage equality.

Let me ask you something; do you think that I said that "Denying someone the ability to go to a film event is as bad as denying someone the right to marry"? Do you believe that you can use two things in a comparison without saying they are exactly alike in every way?

13 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

Yes it's discrimination. Not all discrimination is bad. This is a case where the discrimination is not bad, and can in fact be justified; it's not treating a group historically oppressed or disadvantaged less favourably, it's not perpetuating dangerous and toxic ideologies, it's limited in scope (seriously one fucking movie theatre in a huge ass country get a fucking grip people) and makes perfect sense from a marketing perspective. It's a total non-issue that shouldn't even require discussion yet here we are because boo hoo one movie theatre is giving a woman's only screening for a film with an iconic female superhero.

And if your take-away from this is that the film is promoting segregation you obviously haven't paid attention to the wider media coverage. In interviews and such the cast has been very good in pointing out, in response to "female role model" that actually she is a model for young children of any gender.

No, I disagree. All discrimination is bad - it is a fundamentally immoral and unjust thing. I understand that there are some situations where discrimination may be a necessary evil (for example, I support some forms of AA insofar as they seek to resolve economic imbalance), but in those cases it should at least be acknowledged that it is a deliberate wrongdoing for a greater purpose.

I agree with everything else you said though.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Let me ask you something; do you think that I said that "Denying someone the ability to go to a film event is as bad as denying someone the right to marry"? Do you believe that you can use two things in a comparison without saying they are exactly alike in every way?

No, I disagree. All discrimination is bad - it is a fundamentally immoral and unjust thing. I understand that there are some situations where discrimination may be a necessary evil (for example, I support some forms of AA insofar as they seek to resolve economic imbalance), but in those cases it should at least be acknowledged that it is a deliberate wrongdoing for a greater purpose.

I agree with everything else you said though.

Leap,

The key is whether or not the discrimination is "invidious" and if so is the discrimination against a "suspicious classification". In this case I don't believe you can successfully say that the discrimination is "invidious" or that the classification discriminated against is "suspicious".

Share on other sites

I have seen far flimsier charges stick. You aggressively explaining your nerd knowledge of Wonder women doesn't stand a chance once these things start going.

I can aggressively explain to people that no one gives a shit about a women only screening at a movie theater but it's not going to matter, it's already started.

Looks like early efforts were more along the lines of what I was expecting. Like this article from back in March attacking Wonder Woman and her crew for being too white. Which begins as an attack but by the end of the article manages to link to the trailer and plug the release date.

"The Amazons were middle Eastern women but yeah sure just make everyone white w/e"

Sigh. The Amazons are a fictional race, conjured up from the mind of a comic book writer back in 1941. They were always drawn as caucasian. There is no appropriation controversy as it is impossible to appropriate a fictional race.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I am hoping that this movie is at least good, if not excellent. Wonder Woman makes everything better.

As to the cultural/ethnic identity of the Amazons, in the George Perez revisioning in 1986, I believe it was established that the Amazons were women who had been murdered by men, and the goddess Athena gathered their spirits on the island of Themyscira to be reborn. Then Queen Hippolyta made a daughter out of clay. And yes, that origin has been messed with, but depending on what the movie follows, the Amazonians should include member of all ethnicities. In the comics, General Phillipus is depicted as dark-skinned.

And since the legend of the Amazons was most likely born from female warriors among the tribal peoples of an area that is pretty much all of modern Asia, there's no telling what Wonder Woman "should" be as far as ethnicity goes. Most people are happy with her depicted as Greek/Mediterranean in looks.

As for the women-only showing, it may have been to accommodate women who didn't want to sit in a theater with a bunch of dude-bros going on about how hot Wonder Women is. It could have been suggested by women in the area. I have no problem with it, myself. Yes, Wonder Woman is a superhero for everyone, but as others have pointed out, it's one showing at one theater.

I believe there was similar outcry for a Sailor Moon event that was supposed to be for women and girls only, which led to some male fans claiming that the target audience for Sailor Moon was not women and girls... mmm....kay....

Oh there will be controversy. It's amazing how right now you're pretending you care when in a couple weeks or so when people who've seen the film bring it up you'll be rolling your eyes and saying that they are just make stuff up and it's just the media making them think this or that.

7 hours ago, Channel4s-JonSnow said:

So if it is discrimination, it's technically illegal then?

Im not sure that discrimination could ever be described as a good thing

Yeah, it's illegal in the same way having a birthday party and excluding a bunch of people is discrimination.

3 hours ago, Leap said:

Let me ask you something; do you think that I said that "Denying someone the ability to go to a film event is as bad as denying someone the right to marry"? Do you believe that you can use two things in a comparison without saying they are exactly alike in every way?

Yes, you are saying exactly that by the fact that you think they're comparable. They aren't, not in any meaningful way. Sure, you can use any two things you want and say they are comparable, but that doesn't mean that it would make sense, that you're right or that it would be meaningful. In some cases it might even be offensive, like what you've done here.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Yeah, it's illegal in the same way having a birthday party and excluding a bunch of people is discrimination.

Not really because a birthday party is a private event, you can invite who you want (although if you had a birthday party and wrote 'no blacks, asians, jews' then maybe that wouldn't go down very well either)

This was a public event. It was a public event in the name of equality. The hypocrisy is quite funny.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Sigh. The Amazons are a fictional race, conjured up from the mind of a comic book writer back in 1941. They were always drawn as caucasian. There is no appropriation controversy as it is impossible to appropriate a fictional race.

Well, it is based on Greek Mythology. The Amazons, as an idea, have been around for a very long time. The "Amazon Rainforest" was named after the Amazons of Greek Mythology.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Not really because a birthday party is a private event, you can invite who you want (although if you had a birthday party and wrote 'no blacks, asians, jews' then maybe that wouldn't go down very well either)

This was a public event. It was a public event in the name of equality. The hypocrisy is quite funny.

Why can't Alamo Drafthouse not just make this an invite only event for the women who purchased tickets for the event. Even if some jackass wanted to claim that this is actually "Invidious discrimination" (which it isn't) the new designation would shut them down.